Comprehensive coverage of personal injury and civil litigation

Government Regulation

May 26, 2015

A federal judge in Texas early this week refuses to lift an injunction blocking the Obama administration’s immigration policy to defer deportations for illegal immigrants living in the United States.

Andrew Hanen, a U.S. district judge, shot down a request by the Obama administration to lift his previous ruling which temporarily halts the administration from pushing its immigration plans further, as announced by President Barack Obama last year.

Texas and other officials from more than 20 states filed a suit to curb Obama’s actions, arguing that the president is making an unconstitutional overreach of his power.

The Justice Department already made an appeal on the issue to the 5th U.S. Circuit of Appeals.

In halting the stay request of the federal government, Hanen believes he made the right decision on his previous ruling.

Hanen also carried out another ruling early this week allowing the states to carry out a discovery into their claim of the administration who have wrongly implemented parts of its immigration program

May 25, 2015

The tobacco industry won’t have to include messages on their packaging indicating of them lying to American public, according to a federal court of appeals ruling in Washington, D.C.

The federal court of appeals last week ruled that tobacco firms are required to inform their consumers that cigarettes are made to be addictive. But a judge-panel allowed the tobacco industry some reprieve, indicating that companies won’t have to inform of them lying about the harmful effects of smoking.

The case began in 1999 when the federal government filed racketeering charges against numerous firms including Altria Group, Lorillard Inc., R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., and Philip Morris USA. The Justice Department believed that the tobacco industry was part of a long-running conspiracy to trick consumers the harmful effects of smoking.

Back in 2006, a federal trial judge in Washington ordered the firms to eliminate ads showcasing smoking issues, from harmful smoking effects to nicotine level manipulation on their “low tar” and “light” brands.

May 19, 2015

Lawmakers in Illinois recently passed a bill that would allow public employee pension funds to spill investments in firms participating in Israel Boycotts.

Early this week, the bill passed the Illinois House of Representatives. The Illinois State made the approval on a 49-0 vote last month. Sponsors are seeking counteracting efforts by a Palestinian campaign to isolate Israel.

The bill entails Illinois’ pension system to eliminate firms boycotting Israel from their portfolios. The measure is now being enforced by the Illinois Investment Policy Board, which mandates state pension funds to be divested from companies transacting with countries who have made human rights violations.

The bill also requires the state’s investment policy board to initially make a list of firms believed to have boycotted Israel. Those same companies will then be given a notification of being subjected to divestment. If a firm still maintains its stance against Israel, state fund investment advisers would then be given authorization to seem, redeem, or withdraw any direct holdings within one year

May 12, 2015

Texas Republicans are pushing hard in legislation to prevent local officials from issuing gay marriage licenses in the state, launching a strike against a possible court ruling next month from the U.S. Supreme Court. The ruling may or not declare same sex marriage legal.

Such measure from Cecil Bell, a Republican, would prevent state and local officials from using taxpayer money to enforce, grant, or recognize a marriage license to same sex couples. Only a union between “one man and one woman” is allowed.

The move comes as the Supreme Court is set to rule on whether there’s a constitutional right to gay marriage or if states are authorized to define marriage exclusively between one man and one woman.

A legislation ban on issuing gay marriage licenses may stand, leading to a potentially expensive and all-out-legal war between federal courts and the state government.

As of early this week, over half of Texas House members showed their support for the bill, which concludes its entry if it gets over processing hurdles before this Thursday’s deadline.

Just recently, a federal lawmaker is making a proposal to ban bankruptcy trustees from attempting to claw back tuition funds from universities (and in some instances, college students) --- a legal strategy that may arise in a bankruptcy case.

Chris Collins, a New York Republican, brought a bill that would halt bankruptcy trustees from filing suits against universities and college students to take back tuition funds that was paid years before.

Parents filing for bankruptcy after making payment of their children’s college tuition could be criticized by bankruptcy trustees (appointed by the court), who argue saying that money should’ve been directly spent on their own debts.

With Collins’ bill, it would entirely be up for the parents to decide their children’s education over other bills like medical debts or credit card.

Bankruptcy observers predict that the number of tuition-related cases will increase along with tuition costs.

Specifically, the bill wouldn’t include tuition money from the list of monetary transfers that can be clawed back.

May 5, 2015

Since the massacre in 2012 at Sandy Hook School in Newtown, Connecticut, advocates of gun-control are working hard to seal loopholes found in the current background-check laws.

Not all efforts were deemed successful. Gun-rights advocates believe that such measures are a burden and won’t do much to halt crime. But in 2014, residents of Washington State voted to solidify its background-check laws. Currently, the Oregon legislature is doing the same.

Early this week, the Oregon House ended with a 32-28 vote to support the Senate Bill 941, which entail background checks for gun buyers via private sales. At present, background checks in Oregon are only carried out for individuals purchasing a firearm from a gun show or certified dealer.

The bill has now moved on to Oregon Governor Kate Brown’s desk, who promised to sign the bill.

The bill passage makes Oregon the 12th state to enforce checks on transfers and checks within private parties for long and hand guns.

May 4, 2015

Joe Arpaio, an Arizona Sheriff, who filed a suit against Obama’s immigration policies were met with an icy reception early this week at the federal Court of Appeals. It appears reviving the case will be unlikely.

Arpaio filed the suit late last year, shortly after the Obama administration made the announcement of offering illegal immigrants, whose parents are permanent residents or citizens, amnesty from deportation.

He also argued that he has the right to challenge current immigration policies since the administration won’t allow the deportation of illegal criminals who wind up in his jail.

A judge last December dumped the case, indicating the sheriff didn’t possess any legal standing to take up the challenge since he wasn’t fully harmed by the current immigration policies.

The U.S. Court of Appeals within the District of Columbia Circuit brought up similar concerns on its oral arguments early Monday in Arpaio’s appeal.

The argument concentrates on whether the Sheriff has the right to force a suit, not on legal merits of his claims.

April 29, 2015

In the previous year, the House of Representative set out strong support for patent reform, especially on measures made to cut back on patent suits. Early this year, the House brought back a bill, the Innovation Act, and just this Wednesday, the Senate backed up the bill with support from influential Senators.

The bill indicated numerous measures to slash patent lawsuits made to promote quick settlements for companies who frequently make payments instead entering legal battles that could be more costly to defend.

The bill will entail plaintiffs to make be more specific and clear. It also adds limitations to the amount to be forked by the patent-litigation holder from firms in the early stages of a suit, in order to protect defendants from “fishing” instances.

It also give courts more leeway to reward lawyer fees to the losing party of the suit as well as plaintiffs seen by a judge to have brought a suit with little or no basis.

Early this week, the United States Supreme Court will listen to arguments regarding Oklahoma’s lethal injection issue, which in the past few years involved the use of a midazolam, a sedative.

The issue that Justices faced early this week was whether midazolam, as a lethal injection component, is in violation of the 8th Amendment of the U.S. constitution, which prohibit carrying out “cruel and unusual” punishments.

Before, executioners would utilize two drugs ---- pentobarbital and thiopental --- both belonging under a drug class known as barbiturates. But since 2008, makers of both drugs were so worried of its association with capital punishment that they significantly slashed the supply for both drugs. This pushed some states to go for midazolam.

As an added measure, multiple states have made laws that allow the usage of other execution operations in case the drugs aren’t present.

How the court will rule in the issue may open the door for them sooner than later.

April 28, 2015

The Supreme Court early this week appear divided on one of the biggest civil rights cases in the country’s history: whether the U.S. constitution gives gay couples the right to marriage.

Questions from the justices indicate that they were divided on the issue. Justice Anthony Kennedy has the controlling vote.

The justices seemed to have conflicting ideas over not only landing the right answer to the issue but also trying to know how to reach over it.

The justices would’ve been content being on the sidelines. But a decision made last year from a three-judge panel of the Cincinnati Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit, ended up forcing their hand.

Early this week, a schedule for two arguments was set. The first talked about whether the U.S. constitution requires states to deploy marriage licenses to two same-sex individuals. The second debated whether states should recognize gay marriage to be carried out elsewhere.